Ranger Ideas

Archive of the Sojourn3 Ideas Forum.
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Ranger Ideas

Postby Ashod » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:15 am

Rangers would really appreciate a skill that allows them to dual wield
stun.

maybe a strike that is with the flat of the blade aross the head and stuns mob.
can call it *Flatblade strike*

also a skill that gives the ranger i quick burst of fury. 1per day and is a start combat skill and stacks with haste. the better the skill the longer the fury lasts with a small possible instant kill.

Can call this one *Ambush*

basicly ranger have a problem competing with rogues for zones..
these two skills ideas might give some breathing room for rangers.

rangers need so promo so they aren't sitting at 1west all the time.
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Wed Aug 20, 2003 12:44 pm

8)

I don't think this would suddenly cause people to leap up and grab all the rangers when the game boots. I think people know that rangers are useful for luring, tracking, and hitting. Too bad rangers don't like hitpoint gear, or else they could probably tank decently, too.
Zen
Sojourner
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Michigan

Postby Zen » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:21 pm

Yayaril wrote:8)

I don't think this would suddenly cause people to leap up and grab all the rangers when the game boots. I think people know that rangers are useful for luring, tracking, and hitting. Too bad rangers don't like hitpoint gear, or else they could probably tank decently, too.


It pains me to say it, but Yaya brings up a good point. It's all about balancing your equipment. Some hit, some damage, some hps. To an extent this is true across the board, but in a versitle class like a ranger it's even more important. We do not excell at any one role per say, so we need to be ready to fill a lot of roles.

If you want to make a change to rangers, give them trip instead of bash. Balance shouldn't be effected much by it, rangers will be poor at either, but having to wear a shield messes up the swashbuckler image.

-Llan
Salen
Sojourner
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Salen » Thu Aug 21, 2003 12:47 am

Zen wrote:but having to wear a shield messes up the swashbuckler image.

-Llan


Which is odd, since a buckler is a shield.
Tanji Smanji
Sojourner
Posts: 765
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Postby Tanji Smanji » Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:13 am

Giving Rangers trip instead of bash isn't a bad idea actually.
Stamm
Sojourner
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Stamm » Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:22 am

Give rangers offhand double attack. Giving them one extra attack per round.

Uprgade the dice on 1 handed weapons, they are pretty poor compared to 2 handers.

Aside from that rangers are pretty decent already.

The class should be able to...

Deal damage
Act like a warrior, but not as well.
Have some outdoors skill.

So fix the damage and they can rescue in emergencies (they already can) they can bash if pushed (again they can already).

If they do get anything in addition to this, it should be to bolster their hitting skills.

As for Ashod's suggestions, yeah. Give them something similar in effect to shieldpunch as the flatblade thing, and the ambush thing is a good idea too.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Thu Aug 21, 2003 6:26 pm

There's one central issue with all the non-eq ideas posted in this thread: They're all melee related. Yeah, they'd be useful, but if archery is supposed to be our thing, then that's what really needs to be tweaked first IMO.
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby Xisiqomelir » Fri Aug 22, 2003 1:13 pm

Actually I think rangers should be dual wield monsters.

They should get a 10th circle spell that lets them hit 9x a round (5 prime/4 offhand).
Thus spake Shevarash: "Invokers are not going to be removed"

Gura: ..btw, being a dick is my god given right as an evil.
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Ranger Idea.

Postby Ashod » Sat Aug 23, 2003 5:42 pm

Took me a few to get back to this but..
I agree with most said, but still the fact remains that rangers don't get
the respect that they should.. unless you have a really good set of eq.
I have rarely since i have started playing seen a zone group form and group a ranger to bash in a zone and if they aren't going to as many zones how do you expect them to get a well balanced eq set? Most rangers that I know with good balanced sets of eq ither got it from one of there alts in zones or have been playing for quite a while. This is why a dual wield stun or skill that keeps the mob from casting would be nice for a ranger. I rarely see rangers straping a shield on unless in small groups.. and i really don't think trip is the answer. Give them there own skill and make them happy.

As for ambush.. ambush could be the answer we are looking for for ranger archery.. this could be a archery skill aswell as a melee skill.

As for a spell for rangers to make them better dual wielders.. i don't think that is right. Rangers are by no means true casters... they use very little in the line of spells and rarely get above 3rd 4th lvl spells.
Zen
Sojourner
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Ranger Idea.

Postby Zen » Sat Aug 23, 2003 7:13 pm

Ashod wrote:As for a spell for rangers to make them better dual wielders.. i don't think that is right. Rangers are by no means true casters... they use very little in the line of spells and rarely get above 3rd 4th lvl spells.


I'm not sure what you're saying here, but if you're trying to say that rangers don't use their spells above 3rd or 4th circle, you need to play a ranger a bit more.

Rangers are a versitile class, they don't need to be core. It'd be nice to see them hit harder and have more to do than assist, but it's not going to make or break the class, or make people want rangers any more or less than they do already.

-Llan
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Ranger Idea

Postby Ashod » Sat Aug 23, 2003 10:03 pm

bleh
Last edited by Ashod on Sat Aug 23, 2003 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Ranger Idea

Postby Ashod » Sat Aug 23, 2003 10:05 pm

What i should have said is that Rangers are not known for their casting ability. They are not big casters so giving them super spells is not rangerlike. you don't want to turn the class into something it isn't.

If you want a bladesinger then we should talk about a bladesinger class.

Rangers don't use spells to benifit their melee capabilities.. that is another class.. that is all i was trying to say.

Rangers would benifit to have more rangers skills whatever they may be
but don't go trying to turn them into bladesingers plz.
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Re: Ranger Idea

Postby Xisiqomelir » Sun Aug 24, 2003 9:57 am

Rangers should get a shieldless takedown that caps at 60 and is agi based.
Thus spake Shevarash: "Invokers are not going to be removed"



Gura: ..btw, being a dick is my god given right as an evil.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Sun Aug 24, 2003 11:46 am

The problem is rangers lack the damage that rogues do (even with the bow) so we try to make up for it in damage gear unfortunately rouges can do better than us in damage gear
So here are a few ideas to help us along.

1) ranger only hp hit dam gear
2) innate combat start attack call it burst make us do extra damage or give us a 3 round (haste stackable) haste that will give bonus attacks (instead of 6 swings max make it 9 for each round)
3) make haste affect archery by 2 arrows
4) better esier to get arrows
5) bigger quivers with more bonuses say..some of that hit dam hp gear mentioned as 1
6) ignore all posts here
7) archery while tanking
8) more hp for rangers
9) (least likely of these) downgrade rogues so that rangers have some chance
10) self only hp spell for rangers
11) mebbe a shield spell
12) better tanking skills (higher caps)
13) I dunno pick something
14) A ranger specific zone (only rangers can do) for spome good eq(also not likely)
15) SOME FREAKIN RESPECT!!!!!!!!!!!!
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce

myspace.com/tgchef
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Sun Aug 24, 2003 3:19 pm

amolol wrote:15) SOME FREAKIN RESPECT!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sorry, but rangers, like everyone else, have to earn that.
Zen
Sojourner
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Michigan

Postby Zen » Mon Aug 25, 2003 1:16 pm

amolol wrote:The problem is rangers lack the damage that rogues do (even with the bow) so we try to make up for it in damage gear unfortunately rouges can do better than us in damage gear
So here are a few ideas to help us along.


Not so sure about that, I don't know many rogues that can hit 46 damroll (Essentially 50 with archery) In terms of damage output rangers are on par if not slightly ahead of rogues. The issues with rouges is that a rouge is very multi-faceted in a group combat, and rangers have to give up their flexibility in order to match the damage. You cannot rescue while doing archery etc.

amolol wrote:15) SOME FREAKIN RESPECT!!!!!!!!!!!!


Rangers, more than anyone else, have to earn that.

-Llandrien
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:14 pm

Most, if not all rogues I know have 45+ damage. Many of them are evil, and there is more variety of damage equipment for them. They can eschew most save equipment because of evasion. They need about 4 more hit than rangers do to fight effectively, but this is easily overcome because they have escape (nearly instant flee if they're ever tanking) and again, evasion which saves them from area spells. Rogues also get the same number of attacks, if not more, than rangers (halfling rogue gets more than a 1/2 or human ranger).

Rogue damage also has less to do with hit/dam/dice than it has to do with the plethora of skills they have. Circle, poison, backstab, vital strike, (uh assassinate), trip. . . that is a HUGE pile of damage that no one really seems to want to account for. A tripped/bashed opponent takes 1.5 damage from attacks. . . so rogues are already at an average of 5 attacks +circle +poison+vital strike X1.5 better damage wise than rangers. Oh, sure I can bust out a shield and bash .. .but then ranger attacks go down to 1-3 per round if they're lucky.

Couple all this with rogues getting a beefed up windsong+valhalla+twilight procing weapon, and rangers have no shot of keeping up with them damage wise.

Once melee is fixed, rogues will still be THAT much farther ahead than any other melee class. . . and have superior scouting, CR, luring and lockpicking skills.

There is a ton more I could say, but it is all beating a dead horse.


Lost.
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:42 pm

8)

My rogue has 30 damroll and I don't desire to have 45, because I would have like 400 hps and die a lot, which means I won't be doing damage while a corpse.
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Mon Aug 25, 2003 6:58 pm

But Yayaril, you refuse to wear anything that you don't think is in style, or you think would look stupid (an eyepatch!). I hardly think you could sell yourself as 'typical'. ;)

Lost
Delmair Aamoren
Sojourner
Posts: 604
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Contact:

Postby Delmair Aamoren » Tue Aug 26, 2003 5:32 pm

OH MY god...
Uprgade the dice on 1 handed weapons, they are pretty poor compared to 2 handers.


Are you Insane?! your best two handers are in the 8d4 range of damage. i've seen COUNTLESS 1h weapons that are 4d4 and better. Especially the 1h piercers seem to be pretty powerful overall...

The answer to fixing rangers is NOT adding damage to 1h weapons, nor is it giving them extra attacks. Rangers are already very versatile as either belleshel or weylarii are living examples of. Weylarii can tank just as well, if not better than myself mounted.

Archery has been "fixed" so many times that it's rediculous. First it did too little, then too much, then too little, etc. It needs a bump up, but not a huge one. Haste affecting archery would be neat...

Also, trip is a great idea. This reduces, if not, negates the need for a shield to knockdown, allowing them the same feature as rogues. I would, however, like to see some damage added to bash for those that DO choose to give up the dual wield and wear a shield.(affecting all warrior/bashing type classes).

Overall, these posts seem to be saying "make rangers like rogues". If you want to hit like a rogue, play a friggin rogue.

just my .02
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Ranger Idea

Postby Ashod » Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:24 pm

I love how this post got all out of wack from what i was trying to do.
I was looking for ideas to help the ranger class out and maybe make them a bit better. And as for making them rogues that wasn't my intent ither in any effect.. i was trying to make the class a better class and possibly a better zone class.

i want to add is this.. The rogue class is the most powerful melee class. hands down. A rogue can garotte (silence),wide aray of poisons(minor para,blind,harm,fharm,and plenty more),keep a opponent prone higher lvl than self(trip),instantly kill mobs higher level then self, scout without any worry of getting hurt, cr from almost any place on prime solo,backstab for ungodly dmg, and tank pretty darn well with the right eq base. they are the utility class that you are saying rangers are. rangers don't hold a match to a rogue.
A ranger would be lucky to keep a lvl 50 mob effeciently prone and you take half his dmg away doing so.. Rangers are a dual wielding class and few like to wear a shield.. bash shields are for heavy warriors. Rangers are by far not heavy warriors. the ideal ranger is an elf, elves are not known for bashing. they are known for being very good swordsmen and archers. Rangers are also ambush warriors.. they don't exactly march in lines and attack there foe head on. they ambush there opponents.
Trip was mentioned as skill to be added to the ranger arsenal. giving them trip would make them more rogue like.. I thought we were trying to avoid this. Lets give them a strike with weapons that gives the ability to prone and/or stun opponents. Also like i said at the begining of this post a ambush skill. also they don't kill there foes by overpowering overbearing killing power like most warriors would. They are a class that uses specific strikes to disable and beat a foe. so vital strike would be nice to give to rangers. vital strike isn't a rogue only skill.

IMO rangers are lacking some rangerlike qualities.
Lets make the ranger class more ranger like.
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Postby Ashod » Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:27 pm

O and we were talking about rangers being able to lure... bah so can rogues.. easily if they know how.
Stamm
Sojourner
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Stamm » Wed Aug 27, 2003 5:57 am

Delmair Aamoren wrote:OH MY god...
Uprgade the dice on 1 handed weapons, they are pretty poor compared to 2 handers.


Are you Insane?! your best two handers are in the 8d4 range of damage. i've seen COUNTLESS 1h weapons that are 4d4 and better. Especially the 1h piercers seem to be pretty powerful overall...



What? Am I insane? There may well be countless that are 4d4. But the fact remains you don't get anything better than a 4d4 for 1h slashing easily(which rangers would be using) easily. And if you do, it's 4d5.

Piercing weapons seem to be a little better., which doesn't make sense. Getting a 1.5 foot blade dragged across you isn't going to do as much damage as a longsword, is it? So if anything piercers should be lower damage.

So what would be wrong with increasing the dice on 1h weapons?
Todrael
Sojourner
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: MI, USA
Contact:

Postby Todrael » Wed Aug 27, 2003 6:02 am

I think the reason he believes 4d4 to be overpowered is because of Dual-Wield. Wielding two 4d4 weapons can be considered equal to or better than the best two-handed weapons at 8d4, not counting the additional hit/dam and added attack. Better one-handed weapons would likely have to be too heavy to dual-wield.
-Todrael Azz'miala, Ravager
Get Toril Guides and Maps at Todrael's Lair
Get Item Stats at TorilEQ
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4876
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Dalar » Wed Aug 27, 2003 6:22 am

I know the perfect ranger solution. Make an invoker
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.
Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Postby Ashod » Wed Aug 27, 2003 11:37 am

Dalar wrote:I know the perfect ranger solution. Make an invoker


been there. done that.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Wed Aug 27, 2003 7:49 pm

Delmair Aamoren wrote:Are you Insane?! your best two handers are in the 8d4 range of damage. i've seen COUNTLESS 1h weapons that are 4d4 and better. Especially the 1h piercers seem to be pretty powerful overall...


There supposedly was an intention to revise all the 1h melee weapons but that never got past 1h piercers from what I've herad. In any case, Windsong is only 3d4 and most of the 4d4 1h hand slashers (rangers can't master 1h piercing and most of the really good 1h piercers are rogue only or anti-good) have really crappy procs (whee, acid blast, 3rd circle spell eaten by globe . . . ), with the notable exception of the oak sword. I'm currently using a 3d4 and 3d5, but don't forget that rangers are SUPPOSED to do good damage, paladins and antis are supposed to be tanks with SOME damage. If we're restricted to a damage range similar to warriors, antis, and palis, then something is wrong.

But upgrading melee would only be a patch job. The vision for rangers is for us to be the ranged combat class so that's what needs to be upgraded IMO, not melee. More accessible arrows, specials using ranged, easing some of the headaches of retrieving a few arrows you got from a zone that go stray in a grid, etc. Few things match the sphincter effect of watching the mud crash when a mob has 40 of the arrows it's taken 5 or 6 seperate zone trips to accumulate in it and praying that the mud didn't autosave partway into the fight.
Ashod
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Sebring ,FL,US

Postby Ashod » Wed Aug 27, 2003 8:30 pm

Trel,

Maybe ask for some magic arrows that return to your quiver? I mean if they can do it with a rogue dagger.. why can't it be done with a arrow? o and another question... from what i remember... rangers fasion there own arrows.. why don't arrows get better with the rangers skill lvl? I mean i am sure an elven ranger would know how to make very deadly arrows at a high lvl. this might help with the problem of loss of arrows.
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Thu Aug 28, 2003 8:48 pm

*giggle* I totally sympathize with you Trel. . . I've lost something like 20 sandstorm arrows to various crap. Crashes, arrows flying into water rooms. . .and some just disappearing for no apparent reason. Oh, I have a quiver full of pretty nice arrows. . .but I'm afraid to use 'em. So I keep a quiver full of those blackshafteds for every day use and hold on to the rest as a keepsake, mostly.

Delmair. . . Thank you for the compliment. I must say however, that Belleshel and I aren't exactly 'typical' when it comes to what a ranger is. I think we've taken an amount of skill, ungodly amouts of free time, and poured it all into one class. . .gathering all the optimal equipment for that class and squeezing every last drop of usefulness (and charm, Im sure "PLEASE take me to X zone, Im so cute! *flutter*) out of a sub-optimal class.

Basically, fixing melee will help somewhat with the Ranger. But once that is fixed, the ranger still will not be the best non-spell damaging class. Rogues and anti's will still have that niche well covered. (Ashod did a very good job of illustrating this previously in this post).

Perhaps not with Antis. . . anti's can eschew most hitroll equipment. They need a what? 15 hit with a 2h weapon? So. . 5 of that comes from dex, 6 of that comes from Deathknell. . . thats 11 hit and all ya need is 4 more from eq. .wait, bless! thats 2 more. . 13 hitroll. . .all ya need to do is get 2 more via equipment and you're set. . .and you can use the rest of yer slots for damage. . . plus an additional +4 from a spell. This allows for the Anti to stack on damage eq. . . Max damage for an anti right now (using existing eq) is 58, I believe. That also comes with the requisit 15 hit needed for 2hing. Rangers can get 45 or so while maintaining a 30 hitroll. There are some that can get higher, but that is with Tiamat eq. Typical ranger weapons are 3d4. Typical Anti weapons are 8d4. We'll do the math (hasted, of course and with maximum possible damage):

Ranger: 5 attacks at 3d4 +45 = 342

Anti: 4 attacks at 8d4 +58 = 360

Surprised? Even if you drop the Anti's damroll to 50 he still does 328 per round. This doesnt include procs or poisons or whatnot, I'll even leave that as a wash.

Imho, an Anti shouldn't be outdoing a ranger. . . nor should it be really that close.

Paladins aren't quite as damaging, mostly because they don't have acess to evil equipment (which is much better than good equipment), but they're still pretty close due to the "I need 15 hitroll to hit stuff" thing =)

I think that having double attack effect the off hand attack, as well as haste, giving a possible 7-8 attacks for a ranger would be great.

Before you go choking me, remember that Monks used to have 7 attacks per round hasted and did FAR more melee damage with thier hands. It was 7d5. . nearly triple what your standard 3d4 weapon does. Heck, even weapons from the hardest quests and tiamat weapons hardly compare to what a monk was. So, if monks were acceptable before. . . why not reincarnate their damage in the hands of the Ranger :)

Lost.
omrec
Sojourner
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Santa Monica, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby omrec » Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:30 pm

Always use averages, if you want to talk damage.

3d4 ave is: 7.5
8d4 ave is: 20

Ranger: 5 attacks at 7.5 + 45 = 262.5

(Antis get 3, not 4, attacks)
Anti: 3 attacks at 20 + 58 = 234

Or 3 attacks at 20 + 50 = 210

But I agree, rangers should be able to outdo an anti by a bit more. Which, of course, they can, when using a bow. So, fix archery some more, is what it sounds like we are all saying, right?

Ideas:
1) Magic arrows that have a 95% chance of returning directly to the quiver.
2) Arrows with spell effect procs (chance to blind, chance to stun, chance to blow away shields, etc.)
3) Ability to poison arrows (maybe a rogue could do this for them?)
4) Ranger spell to knock out missile shield (how much would that rock?)
5) Make magic arrows float (no going away in !drop room or in water)
6) Critical arrow strikes that do more than just damage (bash, blind (hit in the eye), fumble/stumble (hit in a limb), hit in throat (stop casting), etc)
7) Make mounted archery useful (not sure how...)
8) Targeted attacks (always fun).

-Om

P.S. Tested ranger vs. Anti pal a while back, wearing similar quality eq (similar numbers to above), and ranger killed about 20% faster. A 50th invoker killed twice as fast..:P Oh, and a chanter with constricts deals out slightly less damage/round than an anti.
Stamm
Sojourner
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Stamm » Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:36 pm

1) Great idea
2) Hmm. No, leave this to #3?
3) Rangers should be able to apply poison to arrows
4) Arrows above a certain value already do this
5) Nice idea, they are wood after all...
6) That might be a bit too powerful....way it's going everybody will be stunning
7) Increase in damage due to momentum, decrease in accuracy?

Nice contribution to the thread Omrec :)
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:52 pm

Psst! Omrec. . . Anti's get 4 attacks hasted, I believe, don't they? Same as warriors? *puzzle*
Stamm
Sojourner
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Stamm » Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:56 pm

Warriors only get 3, unless we dual wield.

Main attack, hasted, double attack.
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Thu Aug 28, 2003 11:07 pm

8)

Poor, confused Waelos.
omrec
Sojourner
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Santa Monica, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby omrec » Thu Aug 28, 2003 11:19 pm

:shock: Waelos looking more lost than usual :twisted:
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Thu Aug 28, 2003 11:53 pm

omrec wrote:1) Magic arrows that have a 95% chance of returning directly to the quiver.


Personally, I'd like a spell in 7th, 9th, or 10th circle that acts as a collect command from rooms within a certain radius. The 5% that doesn't return and goes stray 2 rooms through a grid with aggros will still be annoying and IMO it's unfair to the rest of the group to make them have to help you get it back.

2) Arrows with spell effect procs (chance to blind, chance to stun, chance to blow away shields, etc.)


This WAS originally planned for the ranged system. Proc arrows were originally planned, but I have no idea what happened to them since the development and refining of ranged combat has come in sporadic spurts.

3) Ability to poison arrows (maybe a rogue could do this for them?)


The chance the poison will actually work once on the weapon is still dependent on the user's apply poison skill. I've had rogues poison some of my weapons to test this before and suffice it to say, it never did anything other than letting me see shiny green ansi.

5) Make magic arrows float (no going away in !drop room or in water)


All arrows are supposed to be flagged float. This was explictly mentioned in a news post a long time ago. I caught a few that were missed, bugged/petitioned it, and they were made float. Any that are still sinking in water should probably get the same treatment.

6) Critical arrow strikes that do more than just damage (bash, blind (hit in the eye), fumble/stumble (hit in a limb), hit in throat (stop casting), etc)


Neat, but the player would have no real input over this. Having ranged skills/specials would work better I think.

7) Make mounted archery useful (not sure how...)


Bows are two handed weapons, so we automatically slide off attempting to fire while mounted. Not sure if dire's can manage to stay onto a mount with a two hander though.

8) Targeted attacks (always fun).


And this would be possible inspiration for ranged skills/specials. As is, the most I do in a group that's doing well is just cast dust devils on mobs that are wielding. Well, that and make fun of Rylan.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Fri Aug 29, 2003 1:36 pm

That chick in those FR books about Drizzt... you know, those horribly overpowered characters, had a quiver that magically refilled itself, didn't she? Shouldn't it be possible to create a quiver like that for some super horrific quest, one that auto-collects arrows after they're fired? Broken arrows should be lost, but all others could return to the quiver after fired, or upon the "collect" command. It would take a little bit of code, but surely it wouldn't be impossible, or TOO time consuming.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:45 pm

ill just tie strings to my arrows :P

actually thats a nice idea all as for the ranger vs anti convo anti>ranger
heres why
rangers get cure light sercious critic
antis get up to heal
antis make better tanks (obviously)
ranger are decent tanks when they have the proper spells
andis as discussed to more damage with melee weapons (this should not be)
antis get way better spells ohh barkskin 30 ac mebbe 35 on a good cast
anti armor humm 30 ac...
lets not even go anywhere near the damage spells
antis get better innates woohoo we can wood carve, talk to plants,
find food, tame mounts, and can sneak around

antis can do 200 hp worth of damage and heal themselves and summon there own mount at basicly will...
humm antis can wear more hp eq then rangers because rangers need to do there best to stay on par with rogues

antis get unholy aura (a shield to any good alighned mob)
rangers get umm... yea


i could continue but i think you get my point rant on and flame at will

just for refrance im not saying turn rangers into anti paladins im saying your point on comparing the two is moot
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
Ihazim
Sojourner
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ihazim » Fri Aug 29, 2003 3:42 pm

2.what the heck?
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Fri Aug 29, 2003 3:48 pm

Antis don't get heal.
Delmair Aamoren
Sojourner
Posts: 604
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Contact:

Postby Delmair Aamoren » Fri Aug 29, 2003 3:57 pm

DISCLAIMER: The information displayed below is the opinion of Delmair Aamoren. You may not like, abhorr, or otherwise disagree with what is written below. You may find things written in this post offensive or otherwise dorogitory(sp). FLAME ON!

First off, i'd like to comment on how this became a "ranger VS anti" forum as opposed to help out the rangers that are apparently struggling.

I've played an anti here for over 10 years. Yes, back before antis even had an unholy avenger, but the paladins had holy! Anyway, thats neither here nor there. My point is this. Everyone is using damage as the standard. I wish to dispell some illusions that some posters that may not quite understand everything as well as someone who has played the class as extensively as i have.

First off:
Amolol wrote: antis get up to heal
BULLSHIT! we get ZERO healing spells. The only way to heal is to use your special ability (which doesn't hold a candle to paladins lay hands) which happens once per 24 minutes.

Second: antis make better tanks (obviously)
With spells and comparable eq, rangers tank as well as antis. Yes antis could wear more hp eq and tank better than a ranger (maxcon stuff and whatnot) but then they'd have significantly less hit/dam than a ranger, thereby dispelling the entire "they tank better AND do more damage".

Third: The 1h Vs 2h battle. The reason all 1h weapons aren't 5d5 compared to 8d4 of most 2h'ers is that dualing things like this would be significantly more powerful than a 2h weapon and that compared with more attacks = HUGE damage gap.

Fourth: If you want to compare special abilities, forget not the rangers natures blessing spell. It SIGNIFICANTLY reduces area damage. human ranger vs human anti have a fairly close max natural hp range. This natures blessing saves them from taking a LOT of the area damage taken in an average zone. Antis need to wear a lot more +hp gear compared to a ranger to make up for this.

Fifth: When figuring this 3d4 +48 damroll vs 8d4 +50 or 58 damroll, forget not that the blur sword whos dice we are using as the example procs pretty damned often, adding HOW many attacks? I don't know the answer as it varies considerably, but a significant amount.

Sixth: how many times do you see the antis actually get hasted? right now i usually see rogues and rangers get hasted, as they seem to be the classes that do the most damage and are most benefited. The last time i had haste on me in a zone group was quite some time ago.

Seventh: amolol said something to the effect that unholy aura is fireshield to good mobs blah blah blah. Yes, it is. It lasts a very short duration, probbably not enough to last through a decent combat with a big goodie, and how many zones do you know that are overabundant with goodies? not to mention that no group i've ever been in has really given me the time to remem my spells in a zone setting often enough to make the 1 or 2 of these i can mem useful. Its existance is trivial at best.

Eighth: Once again, mounts arent as big of a need to rangers as they are to antis. Rangers aren't as skilled at mounted combat, etc. Rangers can't sneak in nature while mounted either, so why bother to have that skill? seriously though, you can tame or buy mounts, which is more than warriors can do.

Ok, enough about that. I would like to put my .02 in on some of these ranger ideas.

Like i said before, trip would be a great addition, would allow them a bash type ability while not wearing a shield that is fairly consistent.

The idea of adding apply poison to arrows seems kind of silly. Most goodly creatures wouldnt' resort to a "low blow" and use poisons. Now mind you there are exceptions to this rule, but most consider using poison as a neutral if not evil act.

I myself have done some testing as omrec has regarding anti vs other classes in terms of damage and surviveability in both the arena and out of it. Overall rangers seem to hold their own. I do think that they are at a deficit to rogues ability to deal damage. Right now i think rogue is perhaps one of the most useful and dangerously deadly classes in the game. I think the answer to fixing rangers lies in the archery. Add more damage to archery, not a ton, and fix the complaints of lost arrows, etc. Flagging them as boat, and making them easier to retrieve would be great. Increasing the amount of damage they do in melee SLIGHTLY wouldn't hurt either. The trip thing mentioned above, and the ability to make minor magical arrows (don't know what the frequency/rarity of some are, but 2/2 arrows at level 50 dont' seem out of whack). Perhaps add the ability to make 3/3 and higher but at a cost of time and or money.

That is all for now. I think in all reality this thread should stop being hijacked, especially by people who know not what they are speaking of.

Yes, this could mean YOU!
Todrael
Sojourner
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: MI, USA
Contact:

Postby Todrael » Fri Aug 29, 2003 4:12 pm

Anyone want to write a guide for anti-paladins for my site?
-Todrael Azz'miala, Ravager
Get Toril Guides and Maps at Todrael's Lair
Get Item Stats at TorilEQ
Delmair Aamoren
Sojourner
Posts: 604
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Contact:

Postby Delmair Aamoren » Fri Aug 29, 2003 4:15 pm

I will make a stab at it tod... although some of the other antis probbably don't see eye to eye on my focus with them. If you still want to see my attempt, mudmail me with the address of your site so i can see the format and what exactly it is you're looking for.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Fri Aug 29, 2003 6:20 pm

Delmair Aamoren wrote:Third: The 1h Vs 2h battle. The reason all 1h weapons aren't 5d5 compared to 8d4 of most 2h'ers is that dualing things like this would be significantly more powerful than a 2h weapon and that compared with more attacks = HUGE damage gap.


Don't forget that ranger/dire dual wielding has a rather stringent weight cap on it. Almost anything above 3d5 is too heavy to dual, rogue weapons (and races since they can be dwarves) aside. An upgrade to 1handers could easily skip over offhand weapons by skipping anything over wt 5 or 6, which isn't particularly hard since very few decent weapons fall below that range (how often do you see a proccing weapon other than the sf sword in the offhand after all?).

Delmair Aamoren wrote:Fifth: When figuring this 3d4 +48 damroll vs 8d4 +50 or 58 damroll, forget not that the blur sword whos dice we are using as the example procs pretty damned often, adding HOW many attacks? I don't know the answer as it varies considerably, but a significant amount.


Just for clarification, 2 is the normal amount of extra attacks I see. Windsong got a HUGE downgrade some time ago if you're not a grey.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Sun Aug 31, 2003 2:22 pm

note at the bottom of my last post i said im not trying to turn this into an anti vs ranger thread

ok my bad i thought antis get heal

note i was comparing innate with innate not innate with spell

yea rangers get natures blessing... honestly the only spe4lls i aver use in soloing or zoning are natures bark sleep and vig vritic...thats about the extent of the usefulness of our spells (i will prolly use pwt when i get it too)

cant mem yadda yadda yadda cry me a river they dont give me time to pray either

what the intent of that post was to point out that anti's are more rounded and developed than rangers so what if we get a sword that blurs...doesnt help if you dont have it

i know your innate healing doesnt heal asmuch hp as a pali's lay hands but you can still do damage with it

justbecause you dont use that unholy aura spell in a zone doesnt mean you wont ever use it in soloing. its still a great advantage even if it does have a short duration. wanna have some fun go to never winter and let all those rangers hit themselves to deathj while you pummeling them...

but any way as i said the point to that post (or the way i intended it) was to point out the fact that antis are more well rounded usefull and just plain balanced than rangers.

just so i can be mean dark wrath = natures blessing :P
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
omrec
Sojourner
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Santa Monica, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby omrec » Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:24 pm

Can we get this thread back on fixing rangers? We all know rangers need help, and anti pals are more balanced than rangers, although mainly through eq. Stop whining about how much it sucks to play a ranger, and start coming up with ideas for making them fun to play, AND useful in a group.

So, on that note:
1) Targetted attack
Allows the ranger to target a specific body part on the mob. A ranger can only target while she is not tanking. Targetting a body part is inherently more difficult than just trying to hit the mob, resulting in a much lower percentage of successful hits. Targetting different body parts results in different possible affects:

a) Eyes: to attempt to blind
b) Head: to attempt killing blow (when mob at <5% of hps?)
c) Hand: to attempt to disarm
d) Foot: to attempt to bash (trip)
e) Throat: to attempt to stop casting (like song of disruption?)

...etc. Could also add different possible body parts for different types of mobs. Can also allow different targets when dualing vs. arching, or only allow it during arching, etc.

Any other thoughts? What is highest priority for those rangers out there, to fix arrows so they come back to quiver? To add a multi-room collect spell? To add procs to arrows? To add new skills that make rangers more useful?

-Om
[Just trying to find a use for all those rangers who ask to come in groups..:P]

P.S. If you like Delm, I'd like to look over your anti-pal guide after you make a stab at it, since I have a much more tank-oriented and less damage-oriented approach to playing an anti. Oh, and I always haste any anti pals that come in my groups, so you must not have grouped with me for a while..:P
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:35 pm

great idea but instead of making it in combat so as not to be to twinkable start combat only?

the area's i would have are:
1) leg: stoping kick and bashes for a duration
2) arm: reduces chance of the mob swinging offhand of getting that double attack
3) head/face: possible triple damage or temp blind effects
4) throught good idea(if landed but failed silence let it have a percentage of mebbe increasing the possibility of landing silence)
5)hand: again good idea
6)foot pins human sized (between gnome and barbarian sized) mobs to the ground effectivly stopping dodge (can be broken by body slam bash trip tailsweep ect)

im shure there would be alterations. but a good idea.

heres one make it so you can trans via plants thing (not only self) for instance c 'transport via plants' pcorpsewould move corpse to your teleport location (with consent ofcours).also mebbe players kinda like summon only backwards..

procing arrows would be cool procing arrow + warbow = fun!
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
Todrael
Sojourner
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: MI, USA
Contact:

Postby Todrael » Tue Sep 02, 2003 7:05 pm

Delmair's guide was formatted and posted to my site, which is linked in my sig. Changes/suggestions can be sent to me via email, or mmailed to Delmair/myself, or posted in the General forum thread about my site. Thanks.
-Todrael Azz'miala, Ravager
Get Toril Guides and Maps at Todrael's Lair
Get Item Stats at TorilEQ
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:52 pm

omrec wrote:a) Eyes: to attempt to blind
b) Head: to attempt killing blow (when mob at <5% of hps?)
c) Hand: to attempt to disarm
d) Foot: to attempt to bash (trip)
e) Throat: to attempt to stop casting (like song of disruption?)

...etc. Could also add different possible body parts for different types of mobs. Can also allow different targets when dualing vs. arching, or only allow it during arching, etc.


For the sake of SOME sense of believability, I'd prefer to not have targeted shots to the eyes. Piercing trauma to the eyes isn't going to courteously stop itself short of a lethal trip to the brain. Blinding makes sense for a shot to the head (even a grazing shot might cause blood to spill into the eyes) and most of the time a mob won't be at less than 5% or some other arbitrary low level of HP so it would give the headshot idea you have more use.

Something more original that I've gotten the idea for is the ability to cover a target you're firing at. You use an extra arrow each round (or every other round, third round, whatever) to try to limit what the target can do. If the target tries to flee, rescue, or perform another action that can be construed as having to drastically change positions, they take damage and have a chance of having that action negated (getting hit in the hip with an arrow can affect your ability to bolt across the battlefield after all). Basically another way to try to control a mob with a flavor unique to ranged combat.

Return to “S3 Ideas Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests